Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36778562›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in public health2023

Highly varying concepts and capacities of forensic mental health services across the European Union.

Hans Joachim Salize, Harald Dressing, Heiner Fangerau, Pawel Gosek, Janusz Heitzman, Inga Markiewicz, Andreas Meyer-Lindenberg, Thomas Stompe, Johannes Wancata, Marco Piccioni and 1 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in public health, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed
8.5field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

15 citing papers in PubMed, 28 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Forensic mental health service use in early psychosis: A scoping review.Social psychiatry and psychiatric epidemiology · 2026
    Review
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Observational
  7. Identifying core mental health services required for adult justice-involved populations in Australia: a Delphi study.Psychiatry, psychology, and law : an interdisciplinary journal of the Australian and New Zealand Association of Psychiatry, Psychology and Law · 2025
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors at 8 institutions in 5 countries.

Hans Joachim SalizeCentral Institute of Mental Health Mannheim, Medical Faculty Mannheim, Heidelberg University, Mannheim, Germany.
Harald DressingCentral Institute of Mental Health Mannheim, Medical Faculty Mannheim, Heidelberg University, Mannheim, Germany.
Heiner FangerauInstitute of History, Theory and Ethics in Medicine, University Hospital Düsseldorf, Dusseldorf, Germany.
Pawel GosekDepartment of Forensic Psychiatry, Institute of Psychiatry and Neurology, Warsaw, Poland.
Janusz HeitzmanDepartment of Forensic Psychiatry, Institute of Psychiatry and Neurology, Warsaw, Poland.
Inga MarkiewiczDepartment of Forensic Psychiatry, Institute of Psychiatry and Neurology, Warsaw, Poland.
Andreas Meyer-LindenbergCentral Institute of Mental Health Mannheim, Medical Faculty Mannheim, Heidelberg University, Mannheim, Germany.
Thomas StompeClinical Division of Social Psychiatry, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.
Johannes WancataClinical Division of Social Psychiatry, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.
Marco PiccioniDepartment of Forensic and Neurodevelopmental Science, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King's College London, London, United Kingdom.
Giovanni de GirolamoIstituto di Ricovero e Cura a Carattere Scientifico (IRCCS) Istituto Centro San Giovanni di Dio Fatebenefratelli, Brescia, Italy.
Institute of Psychiatry and Neurology · PLMedical University of Vienna · ATCentral Institute of Mental Health · DEHeidelberg University · DEHeinrich Heine University Düsseldorf · DEIstituti di Ricovero e Cura a Carattere Scientifico · ITKing's College London · GBUniversity Hospital Heidelberg · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: There is wide variation in the processes, structures and treatment models for dealing with mentally disordered offenders across the European Union. There is a serious lack of data on population levels of need, national service capacities, or treatment outcome. This prevents us from comparing the different management and treatment approaches internationally and from identifying models of good practice and indeed what represents financial efficiency, in a sector that is universally needed. Methods: From March 2019 till January 2020 we surveyed forensic psychiatric experts from each European Union Member State on basic concepts, service capacities and indicators for the prevalence and incidence of various forensic psychiatric system components. Each expert completed a detailed questionnaire for their respective country using the best available data. Results: Finally, 22 EU Member States and Switzerland participated in the survey. Due to the frequent lack of a clear definition of what represented a forensic psychiatric bed, exact numbers on bed availability across specialized forensic hospitals or wards, general psychiatric hospitals or prison medical wards were often unknown or could only be estimated in a number of countries. Population-based rates calculated from the survey data suggested a highly variable pattern of forensic psychiatric provision across Europe, ranging from 0.9 forensic psychiatric beds per 100,000 population in Italy to 23.3 in Belgium. Other key service characteristics were similarly heterogeneous. Discussion: Our results show that systems for detaining and treating mentally disordered offenders are highly diverse across European Union Member States. Systems appear to have been designed and reformed with insufficient evidence. Service designers, managers and health care planners in this field lack the most basic of information to describe their systems and analyse their outcomes. As a basic, minimum standardized national reporting systems must be implemented to inform regular EU wide forensic psychiatry reports as a prerequisite to allow the evaluation and comparison of the various systems to identify models of best practice, effectiveness and efficiency.

Indexed as

Mental DisordersMental Health ServicesDelivery of Health CareEuropean UnionForensic PsychiatryHumansforensic psychiatric careforensic psychiatric incidenceforensic psychiatric prevalencemental health policiesmentally ill offenders

Identifiers

PMID36778562
PMCPMC9909593
OpenAlexW4318067893

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.